Why is gun control so difficult in the US?

So if you had a revolver, you could kill half a dozen. Would that somehow be more acceptable?

Click to expand...

It would be less unacceptable than killing 58. Neither, of course, is acceptable - but the fewer murder victims, the better.

Also if you had a revolver you wouldn't be able to kill six people in a crowd unless you nailed them to a wall first. To kill those 58 people, the Las Vegas shooter had to fire 1100. That means he had to fire 19 times to kill one person, on average. Assuming the revolver owner was as accurate, he wouldn't kill anyone with his six rounds.

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

So if you had a revolver, you could kill half a dozen. Would that somehow be more acceptable?

Click to expand...

mentally ill and children using large calibre revolvers would prevent many deaths.
they are slow to re-load and without training cant be used to fire rapidly like a computer button.
they are also hard for children to aim and do not have the distance of a rifle which can kill a mother & her baby in a pram after being fired through a house and down the street over several blocks.

but guns in american are not about protecting life.
they are about grabbing at power.
they are also about profit.
they are manipulated 'as a cult member(psychiatric patiens in groups) trophy symbolism'(you see most of the mass shooters collect guns & brandish them like a phelic symbolism of self empowerment)(has nothing to do with sport or antique collection)

why is no one asking what terrible state the US society is in that it needs to be armed all the time.

in reality the USA is a terribly violent & terribly Corrupt country country.if it wasnt all its citizens would not need to carry weapons

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

They don't report anything to the right of the decimal place, so you lose the .3% .4% .2% .1% that makes it add up to exactly 100%.

Elections are public polls.

Click to expand...

extremely filtered public poll with gerrymandered choices.
screaming at someone to choose left or right and then calling it a poll about the publics moral and ethical desires is a bit of a stretch of reality.

elections would be better defined as exit polls of politico macinations of industrialist mens clubs

You want to ban semi-automatic weapons. Also, there would be no need for seat belts if we just banned cars.

Click to expand...

Oh, that's another false equivalence. No-one is arguing for banning guns. Just "well regulation" as we have with cars. Can't drive a car without a license, no? Moreover, owning a car requires accident insurance, even as you are competent to drive a car.

Comparing transportation vehicles with semi-automatic weapons of war is silly, IMO.

Oh, that's another false equivalence. No-one is arguing for banning guns. Just "well regulation" as we have with cars. Can't drive a car without a license, no? Moreover, owning a car requires accident insurance, even as you are competent to drive a car.

Comparing transportation vehicles with semi-automatic weapons of war is silly, IMO.

Click to expand...

There are background checks in place already. What do you propose we do further. Also, do you know anyone who drives without auto insurance, who doesn't bother to register their car? The criminal doesn't care about the law.

Right. Close that loophole; everyone who buys a gun gets a background check. Period. No exceptions. Stop giving violent felons a way to get guns without background checks.

Click to expand...

Straw man purchases are the main way felons get guns. They just send someone who can pass the background check to make the purchase.
Universal background checks would not stop these, because universal background checks rely on honest citizens abiding by the law. Criminals do not follow laws.
Or can you not imagine how one person could sell a gun without anyone else knowing?
The whole point of a straw man purchase is that the buyer transfers the gun without checking their background.

Trump just repealed that. You can now be so mentally damaged that you are not allowed to manage your own finances or speak for yourself in court - but you are allowed to buy a gun.

Click to expand...

No, he didn't. The federal law keeping those "adjudicated as a mental defective" or have been committed from receiving a gun was not affected by Trump getting rid of that Obama policy.

In the aftermath of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., a false accusation has made its way back into the media: President Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to get guns.

Can't mass murder a school full of kids like that. Can't pick your targets easily. Hard to even kill your estranged wife and kids and yourself, let alone five dozen people at a concert.

Check the high count casualties from the non-jihadists in your link - five, eight - even one dozen is difficult, with such an inefficient method. Killers would have been better advised to park the cars and get out with an Uzi.

Can't mass murder a school full of kids like that. Can't pick your targets easily. Hard to even kill your estranged wife and kids and yourself, let alone five dozen people at a concert.

Click to expand...

Yet it still happens.

Check the high count casualties from the non-jihadists in your link - five, eight - even one dozen is difficult, with such an inefficient method. Killers would have been better advised to park the cars and get out with an Uzi.

Click to expand...

I think it better to examine the underlying cause rather than the tools of the crime. People act as though removing a gun will prevent the problem, but it won't.

Of the 143 guns wielded by killers in mass shootings, more than three quarters were obtained legally, including dozens of assault weapons and semi-automatic handguns with high-capacity magazines, according to Mother Jones.
[Source]

How's the background checks, you have in "place already", working out so far?

In the case of Cruz, police had been called to speak to him over what? 25+ times? Several calls to the FBI due to the threats, his behaviour and the fact that those around him considered him to be a danger. He was still able to purchase his firearms legally.

I think it better to examine the underlying cause rather than the tools of the crime

Click to expand...

And meanwhile make sure the worst of the tools of the crime are not so easily obtained, so the crime is less common and less disastrous. We know that's something we can do to help, while we're waiting on the results of the next fifty years of examination of the underlying cause(s). Since this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting

Straw man purchases are the main way felons get guns. They just send someone who can pass the background check to make the purchase.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the gun can be traced to the original purchaser. That's where you have a start in investigation.

A long time ago I already suggested that the manufacturer should be required to fire every gun made and keep a bullet and serial number of the gun on file That way bullets and guns can be traced back to the original purchaser of the gun.

Yes, but the gun can be traced to the original purchaser. That's where you have a start in investigation.

A long time ago I already suggested that the manufacturer should be required to fire every gun made and keep a bullet and serial number of the gun on file That way bullets and guns can be traced back to the original purchaser of the gun.

mentally ill and children using large calibre revolvers would prevent many deaths.
they are slow to re-load and without training cant be used to fire rapidly like a computer button.
they are also hard for children to aim and do not have the distance of a rifle which can kill a mother & her baby in a pram after being fired through a house and down the street over several blocks.

Click to expand...

That is the danger of a semi-automatic weapons, an angry child that can pull a trigger could potentially kill 50 people, without needing to worry about reloading or aiming.